Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Paul Weston’s latest essay concerns the apparent indifference of the British media and political establishment to racially motivated crime — unless, of course, that crime is committed by white people against non-whites.

Racism and Media Double Standards in Britainby Paul Weston

The mainstream media (MSM) have devoted a great deal of space to the Stephen Lawrence case of late. Many journalists have commented that whilst Britain was a racist country in the recent past, the Britain of today is a much more tolerant place. This may well be the case with regard to white-on-non-white racial crime, but what about the violent crime committed by non-whites on whites, and what about the way this is treated by the MSM?

The ruling elites would rather we remained ignorant of such matters, so there is little information out there apart from the British Crime Survey of 2004 which stated:

…people from black or minority ethnic communities suffered 49,000 violent attacks, with 4,000 being wounded. The number of violent attacks against whites reached 77,000, while the number of white people who reported being wounded was five times the number of black and minority ethnic victims at 20,000.

Bearing in mind that whites account for 90% of the population, simple maths suggests that non-whites attack and wound whites at a rate forty-five times higher than whites wound non-whites. This is a truly shocking figure and one that should be of enormous concern to the race relations industry, the government and the media, who purport to be intensely interested in both racial crime and “community cohesion”. However, this appears not to be the case at all.

For those aware of what has been happening in Britain (and all over the West), this media silence should come as no surprise, understanding as they do that the racial and cultural dispossession of the indigenous peoples is the greatest weapon the hard left possesses in its unfinished war against the traditional Western Nation State.

A major weapon has to be defended, just as an aircraft carrier is encircled with a protective fleet of destroyers. This is why the concept of “racism” was invented and turned into the most evil of all evils, surpassing even murder, which now carries a longer term if the killing was racially motivated.

It makes perfect sense, of course. The only defence against becoming an ethnic minority in our homeland before 2060 is to draw attention to our predicament. If the left can make such a defence not just immoral but evil, then they have removed the one and only obstacle that could possibly resist their racially-driven agenda, and if they can capture the means of disseminating information (such as the BBC) then they can continue unopposed — which is exactly what they are doing.

The left divides society into the oppressed and the oppressors. The working-class man of Britain was supposed to represent the historically oppressed masses awaiting the Marxist revolution, but unforgivably — in the eyes of the revolutionaries — the working class became too affluent, preferring to queue for beer in Ibiza, rather than queue for the bare essentials of life in a Sovietised London.

Hence the importation of a new immigrant underclass, which is then deliberately under-educated in order to retain its status as the useful oppressed. Its members are deliberately subjected to propaganda under the guise of Multiculturalism, which constantly reminds them they are eternal victims and the whites eternal oppressors. This is why their varied misdemeanours are overlooked or excused. To allow the truth to be revealed would ruin the leftist plans. How else to explain the climate of fear that surrounds criticism of non-whites?

Take for example the case of black-on-white gang rape. Back in 2004 the Daily Telegraph reported on daily gang rapes taking place in London. The majority of the victims were white, the majority of the gang rapists black. Scotland Yard was treating this topic with great care because of the racial “sensitivity”, and refused to label the crimes as “gang rape”, because to do so would draw attention to clearly-defined youth gangs. The police service is apparently much happier using the term “multiple-perpetrator rape.”

As has been said for many years, if you import the Third World, you become the Third World. In 2009 The Guardianadmitted that a staggering 25% of black South African males had committed single or multiple rapes in the previous year alone, which correlates to the ever-rising number of rape cases involving children unfortunate enough to attend schools in the increasingly diverse inner cities of Britain.

In 2011 the MSM finally came clean about the Muslim grooming and rape of young white girls in Northern towns and cities. In a quite shocking admission the police chiefs reiterated what their London colleagues had previously stated, which was the hushing up of such racial crimes in the interest of community cohesion. Really? Do they not think that our knowing about it, and knowing the police are doing little about it will enhance community cohesion?

But then perhaps the police and the MSM are not really interested in community cohesion at all. If they were, they might be slightly more reticent about plastering reports of white-on-black crime across the newspapers and airwaves. Community cohesion only seems to work when old whitey is kept in the dark whilst the non-whites are made fully aware of white transgressions.

In America some 99.9% of racial rapes are committed by blacks on whites, yet all it requires to gain mainstream coverage of a racial rape is for a black stripper to falsely accuse three white Duke University lacrosse players of gang rape. The MSM went wild and found the Duke boys guilty long before the case ever went to court.

The stripper, one Crystal Gail Mangum, eventually admitted she was no longer sure whether anyone had had sex with her, but by then the boys had been kicked out of college and their reputations destroyed. Why does the MSM ignore the thousands of black-on-white rapes and jump aboard a clearly tenuous white-on-black case with such a frenzy? What sort of sickness now infects the liberal West?

And the same standards apply to racial murder, where some murders are more prominent than others, as in the case of Stephen Lawrence. In 2006 the Guardian reported that Home office Freedom of Information figures showed whites as the victims in half of all racially motivated murders over the previous decade. The Guardian went on to say:

Senior police officers have admitted that ‘political correctness’ and the fear of discussing the issue have meant that race crime against white people goes under-reported. One chief constable has claimed that white, working-class men are more alienated than the Muslim community.

Peter Fahy, the Chief Constable of Cheshire and a spokesman on race issues for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said it was a fact that it was harder to get the media interested where murder victims were young white men. ‘The political correctness and reluctance to discuss these things absolutely does play a factor’, he said. ‘A lot of police officers and other professions feel almost the best thing to do is try and avoid it for fear of being criticised. We probably have all got ourselves into a bit of state about this.’

How wonderful! As our kith and kin are raped and murdered by racially motivated non-whites, the police “service”, whose sole remit is to protect the population from such crime, sweep it under the carpet through fear of criticism, and gets itself into “a bit of a state about it.” Such a reprehensible and disgusting attitude stems no doubt from the chief requirement necessary for becoming a police officer in the first place, which is not an ability to catch criminals, so it seems, but to exhibit a “respect for diversity.”

Everyone in Britain has quite rightly heard of Stephen Lawrence and the white savages who murdered him, but how many have heard about Mary-Ann Leneghan? This poor white girl was only sixteen years old when she and a friend were abducted, tortured, and raped by Joshua and Jamaile Morally, Indrit Krasniqui, Llewellyn Adams, Michael Johnson and Adrian Thomas. Mary-Ann was eventually murdered (her friend survived).

The Guardian tells us the girls were forced to strip naked, raped vaginally and orally, burned, cut with knives, hit with a metal pole and told repeatedly that they would be murdered. At times some of the men would ask Thomas for permission to do things, asking if they could burn or stab the girls. He gave that permission, saying ‘Yes, go on, I don’t care. It’s too late now. Nobody is going to help them now.’“

After hours of abuse, the girls were then taken to Prospect Park with pillows over their heads, where prosecutor Richard Latham QC stated:

“It was Johnson who then stabbed Mary-Ann in the abdomen with a large brown kitchen knife. He had her by the neck and hair; she was begging him to stab her in the neck….Mary-Ann then fell on her side and Johnson was stabbing her everywhere. She fell over in a ball trying to protect herself but he rolled her over trying to find a new place on her body to stab her. They said they wanted her to die slowly. She became unable to move and just lay there crying, when she cried or made any sound she was stabbed again.”

In Africa the rape, torture and murder of white farmers and their entire families is now approaching the 4,000 mark, which equates to a full 10% of the white farming community. This signifies a higher mortality rate than that of active servicemen in WWII, and can only be described as racial genocide. Do an Internet search on “Farmers murdered South Africa” on the BBC news website, however, and you will find nothing, save for smear pieces about Eugene Terreblanche and “white supremacy”.

The BBC’s equally white-hating and racist ideologues-in-arms at the Guardian manage to write an article outlining Congo’s invitation to white South African farmers who wished to up sticks and farm there instead, without mentioning why they might wish to leave South Africa in the first place. The article then finished with a reference to the imminent “invasion” of Congo. How evil and racist must these “liberal” journalists be, that they can wilfully ignore an ongoing racial genocide and label those fleeing as invaders?

In America there have been two cases similar to the Mary Ann Leneghan atrocity. Both involved gangs of blacks raping, torturing and murdering whites. They have been dubbed the Wichita Massacre and the Knoxville Horror. I mention these American cases simply to highlight the warped and perverse attitude of the British MSM.

The BBC was very enthusiastic in its reporting on the particularly gruesome and racist murder of a black American in Texas called James Byrd, but if you go to the BBC website and search for any of the names of the white victims in the Wichita Massacre or the Knoxville Horror, you will find not a single word, not a single acknowledgement of the two greatest racial crimes committed in America in the last century. Why the inexplicable double standards, which seem utterly dependent on skin colour?

This entire scenario appears surreal and insane until one reads the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) guidelines on racial reporting, at which point all becomes clear:

Guidelines ratified by the National Union of Journalists (UK and Ireland) for all its members to follow when dealing with race relations subjects.

Statement on race reporting

The NUJ believes that the development of racist attitudes and the growth of fascist parties pose a threat to democracy, the rights of trade union organisations, a free press and the development of social harmony and well-being.

The NUJ believes that its members cannot avoid a measure of responsibility in fighting the evil of racism as expressed through the mass media.

The NUJ reaffirms its total opposition to censorship but equally reaffirms its belief that press freedom must be conditioned by responsibility and an acknowledgement by all media workers of the need not to allow press freedom to be abused to slander a section of the community or to promote the evil of racism.

The NUJ believes the methods and lies of the racists should be publicly and vigorously exposed.

The NUJ believes that newspapers and magazines should not originate material which encourages discrimination on grounds of race or colour, as expressed in the NUJ’s rule book and code of conduct.

The NUJ recognises the right of members to withhold their labour on grounds of conscience where employers are providing a platform for racist propaganda.

The NUJ believes that editors should ensure that coverage of race stories should be placed in a balanced context.

The NUJ will continue to monitor the development of media coverage in this area and give support to members seeking to enforce the above aims.

Race reporting

Only mention someone’s race if it is strictly relevant. Check to make sure you have it right. Would you mention race if the person was white?

Do not sensationalise race relations issues; it harms black people and it could harm you.

Think carefully about the words you use. Words which were once in common usage are now considered offensive, e.g. half-caste and coloured. Use mixed-race and black instead. Black can cover people of Arab, Asian, Chinese and African origin. Ask people how they define themselves.

Immigrant is often used as a term of abuse. Do not use it unless the person really is an immigrant. Most black people in Britain were born here and most immigrants are white.

Do not make assumptions about a person’s cultural background — whether it is their name or religious detail. Ask them or where it is not possible check with the local race equality council.

Investigate the treatment of black people in education, health, employment and housing. Do not forget travellers and gypsies. Cover their lives and concerns. Seek the views of their representatives.

Remember that black communities are culturally diverse. Get a full and correct view from representative organisations.

Press for equal opportunities for employment for black staff.

Be wary of disinformation. Just because a source is traditional does not mean it is accurate.

Reporting racist organisations

When interviewing representatives of racist organisations or reporting meetings or statements or claims, journalists should carefully check all reports for accuracy and seek rebutting or opposing comments. The anti-social nature of such views should be exposed.

Do not sensationalise by reports, photographs,. film or presentation the activities of racist organisations.

Seek to publish or broadcast material exposing the myths and lies of racist organisations and their anti-social behaviour.

Do not allow the letters column or ‘phone-in’ programmes to be used to spread racial hatred in whatever guise.

So there you have it. To summarise the NUJ guidelines, they seek to withhold details of black-on-white crime whilst promoting coverage of white-on-black crime; to label any person or organisation seeking to expose the truth as fascist/racist; to ignore any party or movement that opposes the Left’s race war against the indigenous people, and if they become too big to ignore, seek to destroy them.

When the Labour Party was in power, the Home Office website had a section devoted to hate crime, in which it stated the typical hate crime offender was white, young and working class. This was a lie, but a necessary lie in accord with Labours’ now admitted policy of transforming the traditional, racial and cultural Britain they so hated.

Imagine an invading army defeating and occupying Britain. Imagine their soldiers raping and murdering the British people. Imagine the foreign-led quisling police force ignoring the rapes and murders. Imagine the Vichy government and media covering up the details and promoting a two-minute hate campaign against the British resistance hiding out in the hills.

But you don’t need to imagine, because it is already happening.

What a truly terrifying country Socialist Britain has become. A race of once proud people marginalised prior to their eventual consignment to ethnic minority status; abused, raped and murdered by racist non-whites and abused again by the MSM who seek to withhold the truth. If you think it is bad now, what on earth will it be like in forty years time? If you have a small child today, then this perhaps is something you should think very seriously about.

Trevor Philips, the leader of the Human Rights and Equalities Commission, has stated that Britain is the most tolerant country in the world for a non-white to live in. I agree with him, but I do wish he would go the extra mile and highlight the genuine, virulent racism directed at the indigenous whites by non-whites, the ruling elites and the MSM.

The British really do have a sense of fair play, but we can now see we are not being treated fairly at all, and to judge by the comments in this Telegraph article about Stephen Lawrence and racism, the sense of injustice and anger is building. In the genuine interests of community cohesion, our MSM must become less overtly hostile toward the indigenous people of Britain, and considerably more honest.

Excellent article and painfully so true for both the UK and the USA. Michael Savage has it right about the left-wing media- LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER! But then he has been banned from the UK sad to say.

"The working-class man of Britain was supposed to represent the historically oppressed masses awaiting the Marxist revolution, but unforgivably — in the eyes of the revolutionaries — the working class became too affluent, preferring to queue for beer in Ibiza, rather than queue for the bare essentials of life in a Sovietised London.

Hence the importation of a new immigrant underclass, which is then deliberately under-educated in order to retain its status as the useful oppressed."

Exactly! Especially islam with its violent ideology, already dividing the world in Believers and "Kuffars", its eternal rewards for those who die in combat for the "faith" and its hierarchic clan societies built on absolute obedience to the clan chief lends itself as an aide to the Revolutionaries. Or in other words:

Shorter phrased: The globalised extreme Left see all Westerners as todays global Bourgeoisie and Islam is The Final Solution to The Bourgeois Question.

That is why the Left desperately tries to avert all complaints about Islam's misogyny, it's homophobia, it's extreme hierarchic feudalism and it's inherent violence. The readiness with which the Left does just that shows us that Communism was never in favour of anything. That was all as much a lie as the present extreme Left is. It was always just against. It was all about hatred for "bourgeois' " values and civilisation.

Excellent article, Paul, and thank you: it needed to be said and we all should take some encouragement from the fact that you and others like you are no longer just a collection of voices in the wilderness.

More and more as I move around the country and talk to people from a large cross-section of society I find that their awareness is increasing, that they are beginning to lose their fear and are now quietly but determinedly voicing similar comprehension and responses when they come to understand that they are not talking to a stooge of the New Order.

Yes, there is still a lot of their ideological conditioning to be overcome, and many of their discussions or statements do begin with the phrase, “I’m not racist, but…” yet their awareness is increasing by the day and a quiet bitterness verging on anger is emerging.

One reason for this is that the words ‘racist’ and ‘racism’ no longer have the impact that they did - ‘The Boy Who Cried Wolf’ has done so too often and thus the ‘Race Card’ is seen to be what it is, the Joker in the pack, not an Ace.

And, to any who are looking at this article with widening eyes, perhaps even somewhat aghast or with righteous horror, may I presume to offer a few words of encouragement and advice:

· Learn what is being done to you; try to understand what the future holds for you and yours if it continues unchecked.

· Discuss the issues with your friends and associates, but do so in private in groups below whatever numerical threshold the laws of your country permit. Remember, always remember, that your freedom of speech was the first thing that was taken from you in the process of stealing your minds, and it must be the first thing you take back.

· If you are young(ish) look to the older generation for support and understanding – we were educated non-ideologically by teachers who saw their function in life to be to impart knowledge and encourage free thinking, not to engage in raw, counter-cultural social engineering.

· In your heart try to find a way to forgive those who led you to believe that your culture and its achievements are somehow wrong or evil, for they who so falsely guided you were also indoctrinated long before your young minds were given to them to shape according to the new mantra, “Most men good, only white man bad”.

· However, if you are long in the years and are fortunate enough not to have a mind tainted by the great disinformation project try to understand the mental struggle of the younger generations; be gentle with them for whilst they have not had a taste of the same freedoms as you or an honest exposure to reality they are still your future, however much that future must and will belong to them. They are the ones who must shape it.

· Whichever nationality of Westerner you are be proud of what you are, your ancestor’s achievements, your history, your culture, your way of life, and make every effort within your means to reclaim them in their unpolluted form – they are all you have that may save you from your ethnic cleansing.

Sorry to rain on your parade but the conclusion that "... non-whites attack and wound whites at a rate of forty-five times higher than whites wound non-whites ..." cannot be drawn from the statistics quoted. It might well be the case, but not based on the meagre figures quoted.

Firstly there is no mention of the ethnicity of the attackers.

Secondly, if black or minority ethnic communities suffered 49,000 violent attacks, and whites account for 90% of the population, then you would expect there to be nine times the number of white victims of violence, or 49,000 * 9 = 441,000.

Yet the statistics claim that there were 77,000 white victims. So, based on these statictics, whites suffer 77,000 / 441,000 or about one fifth of the attacks you would expect.

Similarly, you would expect the number of white wounding victims to be nine times the non-white figure, yet the stats quote a figure of only five times.

The situation in Sweden is no different and maybe worse. In december there were two hideous crimes: In Mariannelund a swedish 29 yo woman was gangraped by 11 mainly afghan immigrants. In Ludvika a 44-year old Swede on his way home saturday night after a christmas party with colleagues where attacked beaten to death by 3 black african immigrants from Somalia and Kongo. MSM has hardly covered these incidents at all and of course nothing has been said about the etnicity of the perpetrators.

"The depths of liberalism is mind boggling. I can only describe it as a psychosis."

It is like a delusional psychosis. Whites are in love with the idea of playing the hero in the moral paradigm of racist whites vs. innocent non-whites.

At the same time, the behavior by non-whites is rational if you accept that it is in their interests to keep whites in a constant state of guilt.

Viewed at an aggregate level, there is a blind spot and weakness in the white psyche that is being successfully exploited by non-whites.

It seems that there is very little in our recorded mythology and literature to prepare us for this situation. Even at the level of individuals, I have been able to find very little fictional literature that describes our current situation, in which someone is in love with the idea of his or her own guilt, and where this guilt is being reinforced and exploited by someone else. Is anyone aware of examples from literature?

This is an excellent post and very important! My former husband was African. He told me that when he first arrived in UK, it was the West Indians who would racially abuse him, calling him a monkey!Then, my beautiful child was racially abused in school , also by these West Indians, and the school told me that "blacks cannot be racist"!!! I fought them for over 2 years. This particular racist bully was pandered to and protected by the teaching staff, he sat on the knees of certain teachers, like a vicious pet, able to attack other children with impunity. I am sure this still goes on!

The psychoanalysts have been working on apoptosis for many years, it is nearly perfected. When Brehvik was declared insane it was a clear admission that they intend to begin their work in deconstructing the mind of the resistant.

I think you have your statistics in a twist, admittedly it would be clearer if the author had given us the absolute population data rather than percentages but you can still tease out the answer.

If 90%(white) of the population of a country are responsible for 49,000 racist assaults of which 4000 are serious and result in wounding we would expect 54,444 assaults in total (49,000 white, 5444 non white)and 4444 serious assaults (4000 white, 444 non white), assuming racism was spread evenly throughout the population.

However, when you compare that to the actual statistics quoted you see that the non-white (10%) population are responsible for 77,000 assaults, which is 14 times more than you would expect (77,000/5444). Similarly, you expect 444 serious assaults compared to 20,000 actual, which is 45 times higher than the white population pro rata.

Great work Paul.But I find all your work inspiring and not only to me, but to many readers of your writings.I do know this.That we in the west are awakening to the truth of liberal propergander.I find people are starting to look around and say "I don't wont this for my children or my grandchildren.Yes Paul keep up the good work.We are proud of you.

"This is an excellent post and very important! My former husband was African. He told me that when he first arrived in UK, it was the West Indians who would racially abuse him, calling him a monkey!Then, my beautiful child was racially abused in school , also by these West Indians, and the school told me that "blacks cannot be racist"!!! I fought them for over 2 years. This particular racist bully was pandered to and protected by the teaching staff, he sat on the knees of certain teachers, like a vicious pet, able to attack other children with impunity. I am sure this still goes on!"

Yes, Juniper, yes. My heart and my hand to you, child, my heart and my hand to you and your child for whatever that thought is worth.

"Even at the level of individuals, I have been able to find very little fictional literature that describes our current situation, in which someone is in love with the idea of his or her own guilt, and where this guilt is being reinforced and exploited by someone else. Is anyone aware of examples from literature?"

The dynamic that you describe is the dynamic of abusive families where an abusive father 'blames' the faults of his mate and her children for his violent actions.

Straight-talking Yorkshireman Danny Lockwood, Editor of Dewsbury-based weekly The Press writes about this in his recently published book, 'The Islamic Republic of Dewsbury'.

Dewsbury, Yorkshire, England, former mill town, population about 60000, home to one of the 7/7 bombers, growing Muslim population (15%?), huge Mosque and seminary (barracks) - some say the focal point of Islam in Britain.

The large difference in the proportions of "racist assaults" which involve wounding is very telling as well.

If less than one in twelve of the "racist assaults" by whites involves wounding of the victim, then it is almost impossible that most of them were any kind of real assault and probable that most of them weren't even racist. That is, the 49,000 figure is grossly exaggerated by reporting many non-assaults (some of which are not even of any overtly racist character other than occurring between people of different races) as "racist assaults".

On the other hand, you see that the 77,000 culturally enriched assaults contained 20,000 which involved wounding, and thus have a better than 1 in four chance of involving actual harm to the victim. This suggests that very few if any of those incidents were not actual assaults involving little threat of injury.

From a tactical perspective, it is worth noting that the chances of escaping a violent confrontation safely should be much higher if you belong to the overwhelming majority group (relative to the contested issue), and much lower if you belong to a small minority group. In purely hypothetical terms, if members of a minority group come into conflict with members of a majority group, they should expect to be outnumbered initially and be (statistically and factually speaking) further away from any safe refuge.

In such a situation, given the relative populations and disparity in probable outcomes, the number of incidents in which members of the majority group initiate violence against members of the minority group would be expected to be disproportionate even to population, for a minority group constituting ten percent of the popuation virtually all of the violence between the majority and minority group should have been initiated by the majority group, assuming that the groups have similar attitudes towards resorting to violence and towards their personal safety.

That is an interesting example. The wife and/or children are usually dependent on the abusive husband/father, financially or emotionally. It seems like the financial dependence goes in the opposite direction with white guilt, but perhaps not the emotional dependence.

Finger-pointing for shifting blame is a common behavior. It is true that sometimes people do not recognize abuse for what it is. I think that in this situation whites are more like elderly parents than naive children or wives. They are actually adoptive parents, though, where the non-whites are like abusive adoptive adult children.

Here's some financial dependence: Western welfare state subjects, exploited by the "above parties" progressivist powers that be, with white guilt, PCMC and so on being just a subset of the wider exploitation.

Paul Weston -

Nice article, apart from the rather narrow view that only "the Left" is responsible for all this. Need to shake that cold-war mentality, me thinks.Many "freedom parties" are sort of "old left" themselves, "conservative" as in seeking to preserve the welfare state with the justifiable and logical aim to roll back the, "new left", progressivist, US imported Cult of Diversity(TM).Moreover, exclusively targeting "the Left" might amount to shooting your own left foot, for in spite of what you claim on behalf of the BF party (see this thread), your economic principles are not that of a truly free market and your foundational philosophy does not seem to be that of a genuinely free society. You want govt to intervene and stand up for your world-view (which I support in large part), fair enough, but don't claim to be in favour of limited government and free markets then, because you're not.

Here's the paradox: Pathological white guilt for past imperialism, slavery, etc., is largely a staple of the Left. But the concept of guilt is closely associated with Christianity, which the Left despises, so why a pathological level of guilt? Don't know. But while the Left has taken the Christian notion of guilt to heart, they have rejected other Christian beliefs that would lessen its blow: the concept of original sin, the belief that Christ took our sins upon Himself, and the admonition to forgive, including forgiving oneself.

Pathological white guilt seems to animate many of the Left's beliefs and outlook, including the Left's airbrushing the fact that whites are far more likely to be the victims of inter-racial violence than minorities, as Mr. Weston pointed out. Another Leftist belief that may stem from white guilt is that traditionally "powerless" groups, such as blacks here in the US, cannot violate e.g. voting rights laws because those laws were originally intended to protect the black franchise from the oppressive white power structure. The belief that only whites can be true racists might flow from the same source.

What part of the phrase "... people from black or minority ethnic communities suffered 49,000 violent attacks, with 4,000 being wounded" tells you that the attackers were white? There is no mention of the ethnicity of the attackers. You have teased out something which isn't there to tease out.

You have made the assumption that the attackers were white - which could well be the case - but without the complete statistics you have no idea. An article such as this, which is making a perfectly valid argument, loses its credibility somewhat if it relies on our making assumptions in this way.

A very good article Mr Weston, but I am afraid the left would call you a racist for daring to report the truth.The left sees EVERYTHING in race-colored glasses. They happen to believe it is their strength or their trump card so to speak, but it is in fact their weakness.When confronted with a racist attack the argument should be that THEY are in fact the racists. They frame EVERYTHING in racist terms. If it wasn't for their sensationalism of white on non-whites while virtualy ignoring the reverse...we would have nothing to say to each other. In fact we would be agreeing with one another that murder is a horrible crime no matter who commits it on whom.

I wish to post a correction to an earlier post on the trial in Liverpool although at the time of writing this it hasn't been approved and posted. The men involved have been for pre trial with a MsM blackout and will appear in early Feb with the MSM blackout continued. Obviously if White men had been accused of the same crimes against Black or Asian girls there would be a media frenzy. How this helps 'community cohesion' beats the hell out of me. It makes me feel like my own kind are bottom of the heap in our own country.

It likely will be reported on, just not make it to MSM. You watch for it and then share it with everyone you know, friends, family, this blog, Paul Weston, EVERYBODY.You see, everyone keeps waiting for the right politician or the right journalist to come along that will do the right thing. Guess what? They ain't comin. It is up to you, it is up to your neighbor, it is up to your friend to get yourselves out of this mess. YOU ALL ARE THE KEY.

"What part of the phrase "... people from black or minority ethnic communities suffered 49,000 violent attacks, with 4,000 being wounded" tells you that the attackers were white? There is no mention of the ethnicity of the attackers. You have teased out something which isn't there to tease out."

First off, the fact that 49,000 "violent attacks" resulted in 4,000 actual injuries tells me that they weren't actual violent attacks. They are statistics drawn from interracial incidents deemed racial attacks. Which you might have figured out if you'd been reading the article a little more carefully. Or knew anything about how prevalent violent crime is...only 4,000 injuries in a year means they are only talking about a specific category of violence. Less than one injury for each twelve "violent assaults" tells us which category that is..."violent" "racial" "assaults" on members of recognizes minority groups.

Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. Your comment violated the last of these rules. We keep a PG-13 blog, and exclude foul language, explicit descriptions, and epithets. This is why I deleted your comment.

You won't publish this, your sort never do. You only wanna hear from fellow nodding dogs.

But you are the type who can't wait to scream about something like asians when they are occasionally involved in paedophilia, but choose to turn a blind eye to the majority of cases where it's middle aged white guys doing the kiddie fiddling.

But hey, you have a handful of equally deluded nodding dogs all typing away in support of your [odiferous substance], so job done.

It's just a shame you don't have the spine to share your outrage equally. But again. your type of dinosaur never does.

"Imagine an invading army defeating and occupying Britain. Imagine their soldiers raping and murdering the British people. Imagine the foreign-led quisling police force ignoring the rapes and murders. Imagine the Vichy government and media covering up the details and promoting a two-minute hate campaign against the British resistance hiding out in the hills."

Please post an incident when German soldiers raped French women and the Vichy government covered it up.

Christianity is a bit too doctrinally distinct from Asian religions to regard the ascetic elements as being representative of the essential core of the religion, though.

That is, Christianity doesn't fully embrace the rejection of any positive human goods, only their deferment in preference to even greater human and divine goods. In a sense, this is a significant element of the strength of Christianity despite the destabilizing aspects. Where Asian religions usually teach people to empty themselves of passions and desires, and thus are rarely threatening to existing social arrangements, Christianity is essentially based on promises of unlimited fulfillment of desires by a benevolent God. That it gains adherents and prospers despite representing a constant threat it poses to the social elite of every nation is a tribute to the appeal of the religion.

I wouldn't blame Buddhism or other Asian religions for the atrocities, but I definitely see them as playing a role in the significantly greater prevalence of suicide in Asian societies. The efforts to combat this tendency are sometimes comical, if with certain strong tragic overtones, but they illustrate a very profound difference between Christianity and any ideologically founded asceticism.

The point is that I would blame Christianity for the fact that Westerners think that the world is supposed to be their oyster, that life is always supposed to be getting better, and other such folly, but that doesn't cause most atrocities or there wouldn't be so many more of them happening everywhere else in the world.